WANA (Jul 11) – A member of Iran’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission has spoken of an incident which, if true, would mark a turning point in Iran’s regional security dynamics: the use of a tactical nuclear bomb against the Fordow nuclear facility.

 

Abolfazl Zohrevand has claimed that the recent U.S.-Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear site involved a weapon that was not conventional. In his words, “A weapon that can penetrate 60 meters of rock, concrete, and mountain to reach its target is not conventional. This is the same model of tactical nuclear bomb that the U.S. first tested in Tora Bora, Afghanistan.”

 

Though this claim has yet to be confirmed by any official source, it carries a strategic and security message: the nuclear threat has shifted from a “remote possibility” to a “present danger.”

 

Zohrevand, who has long advocated for “threshold status,” now explicitly warns that Iran must achieve a level of deterrence capable of delivering a counterstrike within 48 hours of any nuclear attack. “You have to be in a position where, if you choose to respond, you can do it in the shortest possible time,” he said.

A new satellite image of the Fordow underground facility shows holes that are likely the result of U.S. bunker-buster missile strikes /WANA News Agency

A new satellite image of the Fordow underground facility shows holes that are likely the result of U.S. bunker-buster missile strikes /WANA News Agency

In his view, the issue goes beyond military action. It is the result of years of strategic planning, infiltration, and intelligence gathering by inspectors he calls “American and Israeli spies.” According to Zohrevand, over the past 14 to 15 years, these inspectors have collected precise information about Fordow’s structure—not to safeguard Iran’s peaceful nuclear program, but to enable a calculated strike aimed at eliminating a national asset.

 

While international treaties such as the NPT and IAEA Safeguards explicitly forbid attacks on member states’ nuclear infrastructure, the silence of international institutions in the face of such a potential strike raises serious questions about their actual function.

 

Zohrevand also touches on the issue of “equipping Iranian missiles with tactical warheads,” asserting that “if I’m attacked today, I must be able to respond within 48 hours.” Citing the high accuracy of Iran’s precision-guided missiles, he adds: “The targets will certainly be military—exactly where the aggression came from.”

 

Regardless of whether the alleged use of a tactical nuclear bomb by the U.S. is factual, one cannot ignore the reality that the security landscape surrounding Iran’s critical facilities is changing—dangerously so. “Deterrence” is no longer a distant objective; it appears to have become an immediate necessity for survival and strategic balance.